Page:American Historical Review vol. 6.djvu/795

Block : Histoirc Economiqiie dc la France 785 If the parishes M. Bloch has studied could be regarded as typical of France the conclusion must be drawn that the amount of land held by the peasants has been underestimated. Certainly he has chosen the right method for the solution of the problem, namely, the study of the par- ishes. If other scholars do for other gencralites what he has done for Orleans the answer will speedily be forthcoming. His essay on the grain trade in the same genemlite explains [the reasons for the failure of the attempt in 1763 and 1764 to free this trade from the restrictions which had been thrown about it since the sixteenth century. The fate of this first experiment makes clearer the obstacles against which Turgot was to struggle. M. Bloch presents tables, based on the market records, showing the price of wheat on every market day from January 1763 to January 1769. It is apparent that the price rose steadily from the end of 1764 to the latter part of 1768. The principal causes were the partial failure of the crops after 1764 and the consequent exhaustion of the surplus wheat accumulated in the granaries. Naturally such a rise of price affected the fortunes of the experiment, and M. Bloch has shown through the correspondence which passed between the ministers and the intendant, M. de Cypierre, how the government was frightened into a practical abandonment of the plan. Indeed although the minis- ters were convinced partisans of the regime of liberty they were so com- pletely dominated by the habits of administrative paternalism that they had seriously interfered with the success of the scheme from the begin- ning. As soon as the rise in price became alarming the intendant began to complain in his letters of the conduct of speculators who bought the grain in the sheaf or in the granaries, without waiting until it was brought to market. He discovered that some of these speculators were buying " pour le compte et aux risques des interesses," a powerful company not otherwise designated. In replying to his complaints the ministers made light of his fears and urged him not to intervene lest the people become alarmed ; they gave him no information about the " company." Finally, however, in September, 1768, they acknowledge that there was a com- pany with which the King had made a contract for the stocking of several magazines near Paris in order to provide against a shortage in the crops and a consequent famine. The ministers declare that the existence of such a contract did not justify the acts of particular speculators. But M. Bloch points out how the trade would bfe disorganized by the appear- ance of the agents of a company backed by royal credit. The operations of these men would excite the suspicions of the people and would give rise to the rumors which were at last transformed into the " Facte de Famine." Indeed the existence of such a contract was nearly all the truth behind the terrible charge. The ministers had acted in good faith, but they had been dominated by their traditions rather than by the theories of the economists to which they professed so sincere a conver- sion. And M. de Cypierre's letters show that he was no more consistent than they, for he was over ready to bring back the old regulations as soon as the speculators appeared. INI. Bloch sums up the situation clearly